Return-Path: <karra.etc@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 098F19D
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 30 Jul 2015 06:28:23 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pa0-f42.google.com (mail-pa0-f42.google.com
	[209.85.220.42])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E7A67C
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 30 Jul 2015 06:28:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pabkd10 with SMTP id kd10so18192330pab.2
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Wed, 29 Jul 2015 23:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
	bh=LeN7uuyQ2/MWHLtEWgf8KR+1yrJ0cLV8EJ4JvxjBdDk=;
	b=lwONGzoQ03hCSbSMhukER6Dv1JWidLfnO7YVQ5qBSVXJRJEmDcnHR6TlWL+pWK714T
	aiUACLxzOJofYrRca0IFvF1mNBNZsxfDOOf8mpcnCsznI3T9qmR7q5H0WnyDtNL7SD7r
	VEYBLCHGAgJLvUZGNMYUCpJ14LZKtVkWpimkHwsSVqniAuxyCkHVR9d0Arg7ouvWSLO0
	bo//kGmxth0NOR0ogRyUCHOShuUxc2+2dKCuNVxlbBEyhTAQEhiW9iTgfyyasFDd3b6M
	dWSepvHXVM7mwok9Au4wQsCeSw5wekuxZAQ6ecgnmSQaFsawKRnnODKjGM21Wxmt8z6R
	LM9g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.147.131 with SMTP id tk3mr104134931pab.104.1438237702270; 
	Wed, 29 Jul 2015 23:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.66.83.7 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 23:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 11:58:22 +0530
Message-ID: <CAFkt3UN9iEMnBhTP3J=wM2cu5M0-4hxyOG72GANJpGO9hJS-yA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Sriram Karra <karra.etc@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d580858b477051c11cf49
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Data / Evidence regd "penalties" for not validating
 blocks (Was: Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure isn't temporary)
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 06:28:23 -0000

--047d7b5d580858b477051c11cf49
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev
>
>
> > Miners who don't validate have a habit of bleeding money:   that's the
> > system working as designed.
>
> The information I have currently is that the parties engaging in that
> activity found it to be tremendously profitable, even including losses
> from issues.


This got buried in another thread. Putting it out in case anyone has any
insight.

Does anyone have any data on which of the above two viewpoints is actually
correct? Measuring / publishing these effects will go a long way in either
(a) establishing credibility of the 'system design' or (b) trigger a
conversation on what needs fixing.

If there is no such known data, and someone new to Bitcoin would like to do
that, where would be a good place to start, if it is at all possible.

--047d7b5d580858b477051c11cf49
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"=
gmail_extra"><span class=3D""><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Wed, Jul 29, 20=
15 at 10:23 PM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitco=
in-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br></div></span><div=
 class=3D"gmail_quote"><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">=
<span>On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev<br></span=
><br>
</span><span><br><span class=3D"">
&gt; Miners who don&#39;t validate have a habit of bleeding money:=C2=A0 =
=C2=A0that&#39;s the<br>
&gt; system working as designed.<br>
<br>
</span></span><span class=3D"">The information I have currently is that the=
 parties engaging in that<br>
activity found it to be tremendously profitable, even including losses<br>
from issues.</span></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This got buried in anot=
her thread. Putting it out in case anyone has any insight.=C2=A0</div><div>=
<br></div><div>Does anyone have any data on which of the above two viewpoin=
ts is actually correct? Measuring / publishing these effects will go a long=
 way in either (a) establishing credibility of the &#39;system design&#39; =
or (b) trigger a conversation on what needs fixing.</div><div><br></div><di=
v>If there is no such known data, and someone new to Bitcoin would like to =
do that, where would be a good place to start, if it is at all possible.</d=
iv></div></div></div></div></div>

--047d7b5d580858b477051c11cf49--